<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='slipopinion.xsl' ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='slipopinion.css' ?>
<rss version='2.0'>
<channel>
<title>US Supreme Court Opinions of the Court - 2020 Term</title>
<link>https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcript/</link>
<description>US Supreme Court Opinions of the Court - 2020 Term</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2026 22:59:03 EST</pubDate>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Alabama Assn. of Realtors v. Department of Health and Human Servs. (21A23) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The District Court’s judgment—which vacated as unlawful the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s imposition of a nationwide moratorium on evictions of any tenants who live in a county that is experiencing substantial or high levels of COVID–19 transmission and who make certain declarations of financial need, 86 Fed. Reg. 43244—is enforceable and the stay of that judgment is vacated. (Citation: 594 U.S. 758)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us2r68_b97d.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2024 11:16:23 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>594 U.S. 758</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Dunn v. Reeves (20-1084) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[In this federal habeas case, the Eleventh Circuit erred in characterizing the Alabama court’s case-specific analysis as a “categorical rule” that any prisoner will always lose an ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim if he fails to call and question trial counsel concerning his or her actions and reasoning; the Alabama court did not violate clearly established federal law when it rejected Reeves’ ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim. (Citation: 594 U.S. 731)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us2r67_k537.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 20 Feb 2024 14:46:54 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>594 U.S. 731</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee (19-1257) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Arizona’s challenged voting regulations governing precinct-based election-day voting (rejecting ballots cast in the wrong precinct) and early mail-in voting (making it a crime for anyone other than an authorized proxy to possess the early ballot of another voter) do not violate §2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965; Arizona House Bill 2023 (enacting the early mail-in voting regulations) was not enacted with a racially discriminatory purpose. (Citation: 594 U.S. 647)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us2r66_5468.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2024 17:44:43 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr</category>
<category>594 U.S. 647</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta (19-251) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The Ninth Circuit’s judgment, which vacated the District Court’s injunction of California’s compelled disclosure of Schedule Bs as not narrowly tailored to the State’s interest in investigating charitable misconduct, is reversed, and the cases are remanded. (Citation: 594 U.S. 595)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us2r65_2co3.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2024 09:57:20 EST</pubDate>
<category>Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.</category>
<category>594 U.S. 595</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. (20-440) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The well-grounded patent law doctrine of assignor estoppel applies only when the assignor’s claim of invalidity contradicts explicit or implicit representations the assignor made in assigning the patent. (Citation: 594 U.S. 559)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us2r64_anbf.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 11:01:59 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Elena Kagan</category>
<category>594 U.S. 559</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Johnson v. Guzman Chavez (19-897) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The detention of an alien ordered removed from the United States who reenters without authorization is governed by 8 U. S. C. §1231. (Citation: 594 U.S. 523)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us2r63_4f15.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2024 12:39:12 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr</category>
<category>594 U.S. 523</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[PennEast Pipeline Co. v. New Jersey (19-1039) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[A certificate of public convenience and necessity issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission pursuant to §717f(h) of the Natural Gas Act authorizes a private company to condemn all necessary rights-of-way, whether owned by private parties or States. (Citation: 594 U.S. 482)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us2r62_19m1.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 11:01:25 EST</pubDate>
<category>Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.</category>
<category>594 U.S. 482</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Pakdel v. City and County of San Francisco (20-1212) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Administrative exhaustion of state remedies is not a prerequisite for a 42 U. S. C. §1983 takings claim when the government has reached a conclusive position; the Ninth Circuit’s decision in this case directly contravenes Knick v. Township of Scott, 588 U. S. ___.  (Citation: 594 U.S. 474)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us2r61_7m58.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 12 Feb 2024 12:55:36 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>594 U.S. 474</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Lombardo v. St. Louis (20-391) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Because it is unclear in this excessive force case whether the Eighth Circuit incorrectly thought the use of a prone restraint is per se constitutional so long as an individual appears to resist officers’ efforts to subdue him, the Eighth Circuit’s judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to give the court the opportunity in the first instance to employ the careful, context-specific analysis required by this Court’s excessive force precedent. (Citation: 594 U.S. 464)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us2r60_2c83.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2024 15:43:43 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>594 U.S. 464</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez (20-297) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Only a plaintiff concretely harmed by a defendant’s violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act has Article III standing to seek damages against that private defendant in federal court. (Citation: 594 U.S. 413)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us2r59_197d.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 14 Dec 2023 14:48:07 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh</category>
<category>594 U.S. 413</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[HollyFrontier Cheyenne Refining, LLC v. Renewable Fuels Assn. (20-472) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Under the renewable fuel program’s fuel blending requirements for domestic refineries, a small refinery that previously received a hardship exemption may obtain an “extension” under 42 U. S. C. §7545(o)(9)(B)(i) even if the refinery did not seek a hardship exemption every year after initially doing so. (Citation: 594 U.S. 382)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us2r58_6537.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 11:00:50 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Neil M. Gorsuch</category>
<category>594 U.S. 382</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Yellen v. Confederated Tribes of Chehalis Reservation (20-543) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Alaska Native Corporations are “Indian tribe[s]” under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act and thus eligible for funding available to “Tribal governments” under Title V of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act. (Citation: 594 U.S. 338)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us2r57_4357.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2024 15:30:47 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Sonia Sotomayor</category>
<category>594 U.S. 338</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Lange v. California (20-18) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Under the Fourth Amendment, pursuit of a fleeing misdemeanor suspect does not always or categorically qualify as an exigent circumstance justifying a warrantless entry into a home. (Citation: 594 U.S. 295)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us1r56_7k47.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2024 10:31:55 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Elena Kagan</category>
<category>594 U.S. 295</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Collins v. Yellen (19-422) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Because the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) did not exceed its authority under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 as a conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the anti-injunction provisions of the Recovery Act bar the statutory claim brought by shareholders of those entities; the Recovery Act’s structure, which restricts the President’s power to remove the FHFA Director, violates the separation of powers. (Citation: 594 U.S. 220)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us1r55_5468.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Jun 2024 11:12:48 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr</category>
<category>594 U.S. 220</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Mahanoy Area School Dist. v. B. L. (20-255) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The school district’s decision to suspend student B. L. from the cheerleading team for posting to social media (outside of school hours and away from the school’s campus) vulgar language and gestures critical of the school violates the First Amendment. (Citation: 594 U.S. 180)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us1r54_k5gm.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2024 11:33:28 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Stephen G. Breyer</category>
<category>594 U.S. 180</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (20-107) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[A California regulation granting labor organizations a “right to take access” to an agricultural employer’s property to solicit support for unionization constitutes a per se physical taking. (Citation: 594 U.S. 139)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us1r53_0pm1.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 02 Feb 2024 16:50:30 EST</pubDate>
<category>Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.</category>
<category>594 U.S. 139</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System (20-222) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The generic nature of a misrepresentation in connection with the sale of securities often is important evidence of price impact that courts should consider at class certification; defendants bear the burden of persuasion to prove a lack of price impact by a preponderance of the evidence at class certification. (Citation: 594 U.S. 113)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us1r52_3e04.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2024 11:19:51 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Amy Coney Barrett</category>
<category>594 U.S. 113</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[National Collegiate Athletic Assn. v. Alston (20-512) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The district court’s injunction pertaining to certain NCAA rules limiting the education-related benefits schools may make available to student-athletes is consistent with established antitrust principles. (Citation: 594 U.S. 69)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us1r51_7k47.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2024 13:22:37 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Neil M. Gorsuch</category>
<category>594 U.S. 69</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[United States v. Arthrex, Inc. (19-1434) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The unreviewable authority wielded by Administrative Patent Judges during inter partes review is incompatible with their appointment by the Secretary of Commerce to an inferior office; the judgment of the Federal Circuit is vacated, and the case is remanded. (Citation: 594 U.S. 1)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/594us1r50_m6io.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2024 10:11:35 EST</pubDate>
<category>Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.</category>
<category>594 U.S. 1</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[California v. Texas (19-840) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Plaintiffs lack standing to challenge the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s minimum essential coverage provision. (Citation: 593 U.S. 659)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r49_c0nd.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 02 Feb 2024 15:36:28 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Stephen G. Breyer</category>
<category>593 U.S. 659</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Nestlé USA, Inc. v. Doe (19-416) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[To plead facts sufficient to support a domestic application of the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U. S. C. §1350, plaintiffs must allege more domestic conduct than general corporate activity; the Ninth Circuit’s contrary holding is reversed, and the case is remanded. (Citation: 593 U.S. 628)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r48_p8k0.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2024 11:32:15 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Clarence Thomas</category>
<category>593 U.S. 628</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Fulton v. Philadelphia (19-123) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Philadelphia’s refusal to contract with Catholic Social Services for the provision of foster care services unless CSS agrees to certify same-sex couples as foster parents violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. (Citation: 593 U.S. 522)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r47_8m59.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2024 14:06:07 EST</pubDate>
<category>Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.</category>
<category>593 U.S. 522</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Greer v. United States (19-8709) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[In felon-in-possession cases under 18 U. S. C. §922(g)(1), an error under Rehaif v. United States, 588 U. S. ___, is not a basis for plain-error relief unless the defendant first makes a sufficient argument or representation on appeal that he would have presented evidence at trial that he did not in fact know he was a felon. (Citation: 593 U.S. 503)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r46_1qm2.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jan 2024 16:16:42 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh</category>
<category>593 U.S. 503</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Terry v. United States (20-5904) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[A sentence reduction under the First Step Act is available only if an offender’s prior conviction of a crack cocaine offense triggered a mandatory minimum sentence. (Citation: 593 U.S. 486)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r45_5ifl.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:38:45 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Clarence Thomas</category>
<category>593 U.S. 486</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Borden v. United States (19-5410) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The decision of the Sixth Circuit—holding that an offense with a mental state of recklessness may qualify as a “violent felony” under the Armed Career Criminal Act’s elements clause, 18 U. S. C. §924(e)(2)(B)(i)—is reversed, and the case is remanded. (Citation: 593 U.S. 420)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r44_3eah.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 16:04:08 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Elena Kagan</category>
<category>593 U.S. 420</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Sanchez v. Mayorkas (20-315) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[An individual who entered the United States unlawfully is not eligible to become a lawful permanent resident under 8 U.S.C. §1255 even if the United States has granted the individual temporary protected status. (Citation: 593 U.S. 409)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r43_22p3.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 16:14:46 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Elena Kagan</category>
<category>593 U.S. 409</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Van Buren v. United States (19-783) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[An individual “exceeds authorized access” under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986, 18 U. S. C. §1030(a)(2), when he accesses a computer with authorization but then obtains information located in particular areas of the computer—such as files, folders, or databases—that are off-limits to him. (Citation: 593 U.S. 374)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r42_n7ip.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 14:20:24 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Amy Coney Barrett</category>
<category>593 U.S. 374</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Garland v. Ming Dai (19-1155) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The Ninth Circuit’s rule in immigration disputes—that in the absence of an explicit adverse credibility determination by an immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals, a reviewing court must treat a petitioning noncitizen’s testimony as credible and true—cannot be reconciled with the terms of the Immigration and Nationality Act. (Citation: 593 U.S. 357)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r41_9o6b.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jan 2024 11:39:38 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Neil M. Gorsuch</category>
<category>593 U.S. 357</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[United States v. Cooley (19-1414) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[A tribal police officer has authority to detain temporarily and to search a non-Indian traveling on a public right-of-way running through a reservation for potential violations of state or federal law. (Citation: 593 U.S. 345)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r40_j5fl.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jan 2024 11:39:01 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Stephen G. Breyer</category>
<category>593 U.S. 345</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[San Antonio v. Hotels.com, L. P. (20-334) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 39 does not permit a district court to alter a court of appeals’ allocation of the costs listed in subdivision (e) of that Rule. (Citation: 593 U.S. 330)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r39_j4el.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2023 11:34:12 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr</category>
<category>593 U.S. 330</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[United States v. Palomar-Santiago (20-437) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Each of 8 U. S. C. §1326(d)’s statutory requirements for bringing a collateral attack on a prior deportation order is mandatory. (Citation: 593 U.S. 321)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r38_n648.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2023 11:35:02 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Sonia Sotomayor</category>
<category>593 U.S. 321</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Guam v. United States (20-382) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[A settlement of environmental liabilities must resolve a specific liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 to give rise to a contribution action under that Act. (Citation: 593 U.S. 310)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us2r37_1an2.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2023 11:35:57 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Clarence Thomas</category>
<category>593 U.S. 310</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Edwards v. Vannoy (19-5807) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The jury-unanimity rule announced in Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U. S. ___, does not apply retroactively on federal collateral review. (Citation: 593 U.S. 255)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us1r36_j4ek.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 12 Feb 2024 15:57:01 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh</category>
<category>593 U.S. 255</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[BP p.l.c. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore (19-1189) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Where defendant energy companies premised 28 U. S. C. §1447(d) removal in part on the federal officer removal statute, §1442, the Fourth Circuit erred in holding that it lacked jurisdiction to consider all grounds for removal rejected by the District Court. (Citation: 593 U.S. 230)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us1r35_i425.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2023 10:07:19 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Neil M. Gorsuch</category>
<category>593 U.S. 230</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[CIC Servs., LLC v. IRS (19-930) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[A suit to enjoin IRS Notice 2016–66 does not trigger the Anti-Injunction Act even though a violation of the Notice may result in a tax penalty. (Citation: 593 U.S. 209)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us1r34_mlho.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2023 15:23:41 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Elena Kagan</category>
<category>593 U.S. 209</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Caniglia v. Strom (20-157) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Neither the holding nor logic of Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U. S. 433, justifies the removal of Caniglia’s firearms from his home by police officers under a “community caretaking exception” to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement. (Citation: 593 U.S. 194)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us1r33_4i29.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2023 15:50:26 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Clarence Thomas</category>
<category>593 U.S. 194</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Niz-Chavez v. Garland (19-863) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[A notice to appear sufficient to trigger the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996’s stop-time rule is a single document containing all the information about an individual’s removal hearing specified in 8 U. S. C. §1229(a)(1). (Citation: 593 U.S. 155)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us1r32_21o3.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2023 13:26:02 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Neil M. Gorsuch</category>
<category>593 U.S. 155</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Alaska v. Wright (20-940) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The requirement under 28 U. S. C. §2254(a) that a habeas petitioner be “in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court” is not met if the state judgment is simply a necessary predicate to a federal conviction. (Citation: 593 U.S. 152)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us1r31_g314.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 07 Dec 2023 18:32:17 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>593 U.S. 152</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Jones v. Mississippi (18-1259) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[A discretionary sentencing system is both constitutionally necessary and constitutionally sufficient to sentence a defendant who committed a homicide when he or she was under 18 to life without parole; a separate factual finding of permanent incorrigibility is not required. (Citation: 593 U.S. 98)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us1r30_4315.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2024 10:03:01 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh</category>
<category>593 U.S. 98</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Carr v. Saul (19-1442) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Principles of issue-exhaustion do not require Social Security disability claimants to argue at the agency level that the administrative law judges hearing their disability claims were unconstitutionally appointed. (Citation: 593 U.S. 83)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us1r29_b97c.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2023 15:49:51 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Sonia Sotomayor</category>
<category>593 U.S. 83</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[AMG Capital Management, LLC v. FTC (19-508) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act does not authorize the Commission to seek, or a court to award, equitable monetary relief such as restitution or disgorgement. (Citation: 593 U.S. 67)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us1r28_758b.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2023 15:49:13 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Stephen G. Breyer</category>
<category>593 U.S. 67</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Tandon v. Newsom (20A151) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[California is enjoined from enforcing that State’s COVID–19 restrictions on private gatherings as applied to applicants’ at-home religious exercise pending disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, if any. (Citation: 593 U.S. 61)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us1r27_o759.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2023 15:48:38 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>593 U.S. 61</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. (18-956) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Google’s limited copying of the Java SE Application Programming Interface allowed programmers to put their accrued talents to work in a transformative program and constituted a fair use of that material under copyright law. (Citation: 593 U.S. 1)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/593us1r26_f29g.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2024 12:14:48 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Stephen G. Breyer</category>
<category>593 U.S. 1</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Florida v. Georgia (142, Orig.) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Florida fails to establish that Georgia’s overconsumption of interstate waters was either a substantial factor contributing to, or the sole cause of, Florida’s injuries. (Citation: 592 U.S. 433)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/592us2r25_086c.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jan 2024 15:05:30 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Amy Coney Barrett</category>
<category>592 U.S. 433</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[FCC v. Prometheus Radio Project (19-1231) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The Federal Communications Commission’s 2017 decision to repeal or modify three of its media ownership rules was not arbitrary or capricious for purposes of the Administrative Procedure Act. (Citation: 592 U.S. 414)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/592us2r24_19m2.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2023 15:46:58 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh</category>
<category>592 U.S. 414</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid (19-511) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[To qualify as an “automatic telephone dialing system” under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, a device must have the capacity either to store, or to produce, a telephone number using a random or sequential number generator. (Citation: 592 U.S. 395)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/592us2r23_1bn2.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2023 15:45:40 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Sonia Sotomayor</category>
<category>592 U.S. 395</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Mays v. Hines (20-507) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The Sixth Circuit erred in revisiting on federal habeas review the decision of a Tennessee court supported by ample evidence that did not exceed the possibility of fairminded disagreement. (Citation: 592 U.S. 385)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/592us2r22_jgkn.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2023 12:25:00 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>592 U.S. 385</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial Dist. (19-368) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The connection between plaintiffs’ product-liability claims arising from car accidents occurring in each plaintiff’s State of residence and Ford’s activities in those States is sufficient to support specific jurisdiction in the respective State courts even though the automobiles involved in the accidents were manufactured and sold elsewhere. (Citation: 592 U.S. 351)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/592us2r21_p86a.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2024 14:49:25 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Elena Kagan</category>
<category>592 U.S. 351</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Torres v. Madrid (19-292) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Application of physical force to the body of a person with intent to restrain is a seizure even if the person does not submit and is not subdued. (Citation: 592 U.S. 306)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/592us2r20_o759.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2023 10:40:56 EST</pubDate>
<category>Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.</category>
<category>592 U.S. 306</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski (19-968) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[A request for nominal damages satisfies the redressability element necessary for Article III standing where a plaintiff’s claim is based on a completed violation of a legal right. (Citation: 592 U.S. 279)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/592us2r19_8mjp.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2023 10:19:50 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Clarence Thomas</category>
<category>592 U.S. 279</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[United States Fish and Wildlife Serv. v. Sierra Club, Inc. (19-547) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The deliberative process privilege protects from disclosure under FOIA in-house draft biological opinions that are both predecisional and deliberative, even if the drafts reflect the agencies’ last views about a proposal. (Citation: 592 U.S. 261)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/592us2r18_7l48.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2023 10:23:30 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Amy Coney Barrett</category>
<category>592 U.S. 261</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Pereida v. Wilkinson (19-438) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[A nonpermanent resident seeking to cancel a lawful removal order fails to carry his burden of showing that he has not been convicted of a disqualifying offense when the statutory conviction on his record is ambiguous regarding whether a disqualifying offense formed the basis of his conviction. (Citation: 592 U.S. 224)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/592us2r17_l537.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2024 10:45:38 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Neil M. Gorsuch</category>
<category>592 U.S. 224</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Brownback v. King (19-546) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The District Court’s order dismissing King’s Federal Tort Claims Act claims was a judgment on the merits that can trigger the Act’s judgment bar to block his Bivens claims.  See 28 U. S. C. §2676; Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U. S. 388. (Citation: 592 U.S. 209)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/592us2r16_1971.pdf</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2024 12:42:01 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Clarence Thomas</category>
<category>592 U.S. 209</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Republic of Hungary v. Simon (18-1447) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Judgment vacated and case remanded to the District of Columbia Circuit for further proceedings consistent with Federal Republic of Germany v. Philipp, 592 U. S. ___ (2021). (Citation: 592 U.S. 207)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=247</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:32:35 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>592 U.S. 207</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Salinas v. Railroad Retirement Bd. (19-199) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The U. S. Railroad Retirement Board’s denial of a request to reopen a prior benefits determination under the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act is subject to judicial review. (Citation: 592 U.S. 188)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=228</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:32:08 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Sonia Sotomayor</category>
<category>592 U.S. 188</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Federal Republic of Germany v. Philipp (19-351) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s expropriation exception, 28 U. S. C. §1605(a)(3), incorporates the domestic takings rule, which recognizes that a foreign sovereign’s taking of its own nationals’ property is not a violation of international law. (Citation: 592 U.S. 169)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=209</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:31:41 EST</pubDate>
<category>Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.</category>
<category>592 U.S. 169</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc. (19-963) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Certiorari dismissed as improvidently granted. (Citation: 592 U.S. 168)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=208</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:31:17 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>592 U.S. 168</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Chicago v. Fulton (19-357) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The mere retention of estate property after the filing of a bankruptcy petition does not violate 11 U. S. C. §362(a)(3), which operates as a “stay” of “any act” to “exercise control” over the property of the estate. (Citation: 592 U.S. 154)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=194</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:30:51 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr</category>
<category>592 U.S. 154</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Trump v. New York (20-366) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Because plaintiffs have not shown standing and because the claims presented are not ripe for adjudication, the District Court’s judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. (Citation: 592 U.S. 125)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=165</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:30:21 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>592 U.S. 125</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Shinn v. Kayer (19-1302) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Under the deferential standard of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, the Ninth Circuit exceeded its authority in rejecting the state court’s determination that Kayer failed to show prejudice in his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim. (Citation: 592 U.S. 111)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=151</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:29:56 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>592 U.S. 111</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Texas v. New Mexico (65, Orig.) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Texas’s motion to review the Pecos River Master’s determination—that New Mexico was entitled to a delivery credit for evaporated water stored at Texas’s request under the Pecos River Compact—is denied. (Citation: 592 U.S. 98)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=138</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:29:32 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh</category>
<category>592 U.S. 98</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Rutledge v. Pharmaceutical Care Management Assn. (18-540) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Arkansas’ Act 900—which effectively requires pharmacy benefit managers to reimburse Arkansas pharmacies for the cost of drugs covered by prescription-drug plans at a price equal to or higher than the pharmacy’s wholesale cost—is not pre-empted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. (Citation: 592 U.S. 80)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=120</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:28:59 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Sonia Sotomayor</category>
<category>592 U.S. 80</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[United States v. Briggs (19-108) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Respondents’ prosecutions for military rape were timely commenced under the Uniform Code of Military Justice’s statute of limitations. (Citation: 592 U.S. 69)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=109</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:28:28 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr</category>
<category>592 U.S. 69</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Carney v. Adams (19-309) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Because plaintiff Adams has not shown that he was “able and ready” to apply for a judicial vacancy in the  imminent future, Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U. S. 244, 262, he has failed to demonstrate Article III standing to challenge the Delaware Constitution’s political balance requirement for appointments to the State’s major courts. (Citation: 592 U.S. 53)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=93</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:27:56 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Stephen G. Breyer</category>
<category>592 U.S. 53</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Tanzin v. Tanvir (19-71) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993’s express remedies provision, see 42 U. S. C. §2000bb–1(c), permits litigants, when appropriate, to obtain money damages against federal officials in their individual capacities. (Citation: 592 U.S. 43)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=83</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:27:31 EST</pubDate>
<category>Justice Clarence Thomas</category>
<category>592 U.S. 43</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo (20A87) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Respondent is enjoined from enforcing Executive Order 202.68’s 10- and 25-person occupancy limits on Applicant pending disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is timely sought. (Citation: 592 U.S. 14)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=54</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:27:00 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>592 U.S. 14</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Taylor v. Riojas (19-1261) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Because any reasonable correctional officer should have realized that inmate Taylor’s conditions of confinement offended the Eighth Amendment, the Fifth Circuit erred in granting the officers qualified immunity. (Citation: 592 U.S. 7)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=47</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:26:34 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>592 U.S. 7</category>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Mckesson v. Doe (19-1108) ]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[Under the unusual circumstances of this case, the Fifth Circuit should not have ventured into such an uncertain area of state tort law without first using state certification procedures to seek guidance from the Louisiana Supreme Court. (Citation: 592 U.S. 1)  ]]></description>
<link>http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/preliminaryprint/592US1PP_web.pdf#page=41</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 16:12:20 EST</pubDate>
<category>Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion</category>
<category>592 U.S. 1</category>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>